diff options
| author | Joe Carstairs <me@joeac.net> | 2026-08-04 15:26:29 +0100 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Joe Carstairs <me@joeac.net> | 2026-08-04 15:26:29 +0100 |
| commit | 0d1b0531cecb6e4fdabee0e4c4e16079328f54e4 (patch) | |
| tree | 92a62d80bd709968ff9feaea5ed896a3ecf57b94 /chapter5.md | |
| parent | e377bebedc45b6e4366844e8cfa521b079fb9f72 (diff) | |
adds a bit about de-politicisation
Diffstat (limited to 'chapter5.md')
| -rw-r--r-- | chapter5.md | 2 |
1 files changed, 1 insertions, 1 deletions
diff --git a/chapter5.md b/chapter5.md index 86805b6..0f7b83d 100644 --- a/chapter5.md +++ b/chapter5.md @@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ aren't feasible. Why are green rhetors failing on the fundamentals? One common suggestion, explored in chapter 2, is that green rhetors should avoid the motif of catastrophe, or, in a certain sense, 'apocalypse.' Catastrophic rhetoric has been accused of creating -resignation, despair, apathy, and dismissal, and of killing genuine politics, +resignation, despair, apathy, and dismissal, and of killing political contest, driving the fundamental problems discussed in chapter 1. This line of thought, together with the fact that 'apocalypse' is treated as a catastrophic symbol in popular culture, leads Frances Flannery to suggest that |
